It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 17:42

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# I find this CR on Testmagic, lot of viewers chose D but the

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 30 Jan 2009
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

I find this CR on Testmagic, lot of viewers chose D but the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2009, 21:07
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (00:00) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

(I find this CR on Testmagic, lot of viewers chose D but the original poster say the OA is B? so want to discuss with you, thanks in advance.)

Epicurus Pizzeria Currently, Epicurus Pizzeria has only regular sized tables.? However, many customers who come to watch the musicians at Epicurus prefer tall tables with stools as they would afford a better view.? In addition, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at regular sized tables. Therefore, to increase profitability, Epicurus should replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools.

Which of the following, if true, weakens the argument?

A. A client at Epicurus preferring to sit at a tall table is an exception to the generalization about lingering
B. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.
C. The price of meals ordered by musicians dining at Epicurus compensates for extended time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
D. Customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E. Some musicians come to the Epicurus to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

Think it again, I vote D.
The line of the reasoning is that more high tables and stools, more profit will derive because:
the high tables and stools can provide a better view to satisfy the customers and that these customers will stay shorter time and they will not occupy the high tables and stoools longer, so with the same quantities of high tables and stoools,more consumers can ues these talbes and stools,thus more profit will get.

But D says:
stay less time, spend less money.
So, if Epicurus Pizzeria replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools, the profit will drop because more customers will spend less money.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2472

Kudos [?]: 843 [0], given: 19

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2009, 22:59
fanchen wrote:
Epicurus Pizzeria Currently, Epicurus Pizzeria has only regular sized tables.? However, many customers who come to watch the musicians at Epicurus prefer tall tables with stools as they would afford a better view.? In addition, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at regular sized tables. Therefore, to increase profitability, Epicurus should replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools.

Which of the following, if true, weakens the argument?

A. A client at Epicurus preferring to sit at a tall table is an exception to the generalization about lingering
B. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.
C. The price of meals ordered by musicians dining at Epicurus compensates for extended time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
D. Customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E. Some musicians come to the Epicurus to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

D is not related to the plan of Epicurus Pizzeria. Its plan is to replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools because people/visitors prefer tall tables with stools.

B talks about the possible flaws of the plan. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view. If there is no view, the plan cannot attract more customers.

Therefore, B only makes sense. D is completely unrelated to the plan.
_________________

Gmat: http://gmatclub.com/forum/everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html

GT

Kudos [?]: 843 [0], given: 19

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2009, 23:07
Exactly
GMAT TIGER wrote:
fanchen wrote:
Epicurus Pizzeria Currently, Epicurus Pizzeria has only regular sized tables.? However, many customers who come to watch the musicians at Epicurus prefer tall tables with stools as they would afford a better view.? In addition, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at regular sized tables. Therefore, to increase profitability, Epicurus should replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools.

Which of the following, if true, weakens the argument?

A. A client at Epicurus preferring to sit at a tall table is an exception to the generalization about lingering
B. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.
C. The price of meals ordered by musicians dining at Epicurus compensates for extended time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
D. Customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E. Some musicians come to the Epicurus to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

D is not related to the plan of Epicurus Pizzeria. Its plan is to replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools because people/visitors prefer tall tables with stools.

B talks about the possible flaws of the plan. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view. If there is no view, the plan cannot attract more customers.

Therefore, B only makes sense. D is completely unrelated to the plan.

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 276

Kudos [?]: 116 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2009, 23:12
GMAT TIGER wrote:
fanchen wrote:
Epicurus Pizzeria Currently, Epicurus Pizzeria has only regular sized tables.? However, many customers who come to watch the musicians at Epicurus prefer tall tables with stools as they would afford a better view.? In addition, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at regular sized tables. Therefore, to increase profitability, Epicurus should replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools.

Which of the following, if true, weakens the argument?

A. A client at Epicurus preferring to sit at a tall table is an exception to the generalization about lingering
B. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.
C. The price of meals ordered by musicians dining at Epicurus compensates for extended time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
D. Customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E. Some musicians come to the Epicurus to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

D is not related to the plan of Epicurus Pizzeria. Its plan is to replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools because people/visitors prefer tall tables with stools.

B talks about the possible flaws of the plan. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view. If there is no view, the plan cannot attract more customers.

Therefore, B only makes sense. D is completely unrelated to the plan.

While I agree that the answer is D, I disagree that B is irrelevant. B actually provides an additional reason for why the change in tables should be made (i.e. D actually strengthens the conclusion).

Kudos [?]: 116 [0], given: 2

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 426

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 4

Schools: Kellogg Class of 2012

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2009, 23:50
I don't agree completely with GMATTIGER's explanation .

In asking us to weaken the argument, the question wants us to prove that the proposal in the stem will not increase profitability

The argument says that 'many' not 'all' customers go to watch muscians. So, even if the proposal in B were to be put in place, the argument is not affected - the profitability will not come down- because the remaining customers can continue to sit at regular sized tables as they are not bothered about the 'view'.

Since 'many' customers want the 'view', how can the remaining small segment of customers, who are not bothered about the view, stop coming. They will continue to come because they are not bothered about the view anyway. The customers who want the 'view' can continue coming because they are getting the view anyway

This doesn't hurt the argument

Option D hurts the argument because the argument assumes that if the 'customer spending time' at the restaurant is reduced there would be more customers( as though many customers wait outside) and all of them spend equally thus increasing the profitability. But, if the customers spend less as a result of decreased 'spending time' then the strategy of replacing the tables will not work because the profitability will not be increased

I choose D

Cheers,
Unplugged

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 4

Intern
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2009, 04:10
I vote B

D doesn't necessarily weakens the argument.
Consider this, if customers spend significantly much less time and pay slightly less than those who remain much longer and pay slightly higher, then doing so will probably help the restaurant increase profit

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2009, 04:23
Pls refer to fanchen's post. OA is B indeed and not D

chicagocubsrule wrote:
GMAT TIGER wrote:
fanchen wrote:
Epicurus Pizzeria Currently, Epicurus Pizzeria has only regular sized tables.? However, many customers who come to watch the musicians at Epicurus prefer tall tables with stools as they would afford a better view.? In addition, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at regular sized tables. Therefore, to increase profitability, Epicurus should replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools.

Which of the following, if true, weakens the argument?

A. A client at Epicurus preferring to sit at a tall table is an exception to the generalization about lingering
B. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.
C. The price of meals ordered by musicians dining at Epicurus compensates for extended time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
D. Customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E. Some musicians come to the Epicurus to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

D is not related to the plan of Epicurus Pizzeria. Its plan is to replace some of its regular seating with high tables and stools because people/visitors prefer tall tables with stools.

B talks about the possible flaws of the plan. If enough tall tables are provided to satisfy all of Epicurus' customers interested in such seating, there would be no view. If there is no view, the plan cannot attract more customers.

Therefore, B only makes sense. D is completely unrelated to the plan.

While I agree that the answer is D, I disagree that B is irrelevant. B actually provides an additional reason for why the change in tables should be made (i.e. D actually strengthens the conclusion).

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 30 Jan 2009
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2009, 05:04
thanks a lot for all of your help.

I post the original link of the problem as below for your reference:

http://www.urch.com/forums/gmat-critica ... zeria.html

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: CR:Epicurus Pizzeria   [#permalink] 31 Jan 2009, 05:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by